A Closer Look At The History Of The 'Super Bowl Hangover' Effect

Since 1998, 5 of 11 Super Bowl champions (44%) have missed the playoffs the next year (assuming the 2009 Steelers don’t make it). Note that 1998 is a few years after the start of free agency, when top teams started to be impacted by the loss of key players. Previous to free agency, teams that drafted well could stockpile talent and become “dynasties.” Since then, only the Patriots have been able to win the Super Bowl two years in a row.

Also, 3 of the 4 most recent teams that suffered the “hangover” did bounce back and make the playoffs the following year. Let’s hope the Steelers make it 4 of 5 next year.

In all likelihood, although the Steelers probably will be competitive in 2010, really the momentum will pay off in 2011 and/or 2012.

Here’s to knockin’ teams out of contention in the meantime…if you can’t make the playoffs, you might as well bring some down with you.

Would be to see the early predictions of how the team would do the following year. Like this year I expected us to do really well after the SB. I had a 12-4 prediction.

After we won SB XL, I did not have as high hopes for the following year. We made an improbable run and lost players like Bettis, Faneca, and Randle El. Also, wasn’t that the year of the Motorcycle incident? I’d assume my best prediction for that year was not much better than 8-8, probably 9-7.

That’s be impossible to get all the “predictions”, but a lot of teams may not go through “hangovers” as far as attitude and effort go. Pretty much all SB teams are stripped of FAs who get overpaid (Nate Washington & Randle El).

Anyway, I wouldn’t argue we have a “hangover” this year, its just two major injuries on defense and an offense that can’t find an identity with a bad OC. It was easier to hide the bad OC last year when our D constantly put the offense in the best circumstances, even then there were still grumbles about our offense.

Great write-up though Blitz. I was considering doing a similar post in the off-season, but you beat me to it. Thanks for the break down!

True, teams have done generally well the year after the Super Bowl. Two years after, 20 teams miss the playoffs, 24 make it in. Of those that make it in, 113 bow out in their first playoff game. That means 31 out of 44 teams cannot produce a playoff win (which is generally considered a successful season, although maybe not for a recent Super Bowl winner).

For whatever reason, teams are not very successful two years after they win the SB. Only three out of 44 teams made it back to the Super Bowl two years later. What is surprising is that all three of those happened in the last 15 years, when we would think free agency would ravage a team.

My interpretation: teams generally are on the decline two years after they win a Super Bowl. The window gets smaller after two years, instead of one, because players have aged twice as many years, other teams have had twice as many years to steal free agents and coaches, teams have drafted at the back of the draft for one or two years, and teams have had two years where the cost of resigned players has been higher than it would have been without the Super Bowl win.

between this story and the ad for “The Hangover”currently running on the front page ;)

I will compare seasons after Super Bowls by coaches that won in their second year as head coach of a team.

Tom Flores coach of the Raiders in Super Bowl XV: His second year as coach. Followed with 7-9 and no playoffs, but rebounded in 83’ and won another with the Raiders in LA.

Bill Belichick coach of the Pats in Super Bowl XXXVI: His second year as their coach. Followed with 9-7 and missed the playoffs. We all know he rebounded.

Brain Billick coached the Ravens in Super Bowl XXXV: His second year as coach, followed that up with a playoff appearance and never smelled the promised land again.

Joe Gibbs coached the Redskins in Super Bowl XVII lost in the Super Bowl the next year but rebounded nicely to win two more SBs.

It looks to me that winning in your second year is a good indicator even if you crash your second year. Three of four of the coaches that won Super Bowls in their second year go on to repeat at some time or another. Billick was the exception, but he did a good job during his tenure.

Coaches that win in their first year don’t fair so well. I haven’t looked into it but I think they two are Switzer and Gruden. There may be more but I’m doing all of this from memory. You can check me on all of this.

…though a SB champion in 1996 with the Packers was not part of any repeat championship

1. Super Bowl winner gets last #1 draft pick.
2. Division winner has to face all of the division winners in the conference next season.
3. Super Bowl winners have good players who are targeted in free agency.
4. Super Bowl winners have good coaches who get targeted for other coaching jobs.

In addition, December and January football has a lot to do with who is healthy, and a little less to do with who is good.

The fact that some teams have repeated is more remarkable than most teams not repeating.

How who knew winning a SB could be such a bad thing….

Steelers are not the 49 ers and you guys should be lucky and happy with two Superbowls in this decade This ain’t the seventies